Skip to main content

About your Search

20130226
20130226
STATION
MSNBC 4
MSNBCW 4
CSPAN2 3
CNBC 2
CNN 2
CNNW 2
KQED (PBS) 1
WJLA (ABC) 1
WMAR (ABC) 1
WMPT (PBS) 1
WTTG 1
LANGUAGE
English 29
Search Results 0 to 28 of about 29 (some duplicates have been removed)
the car is gregg bergersen. he's a civilian analyst at the pentagon with one of the nation's highest security clearances. his companion is tai shen kuo, a spy for the people's republic of china. bergersen knew a secret that the chinese desperately wanted to know, and neither man knows that what they're about to do is being recorded by two cameras the fbi has concealed in their car. >> let you have the money. >> oh, oh. are you sure that that's okay? >> yeah, it's fine. >> welcome to 60 minutes on cnbc. i'm bob simon. in this edition, we turn our attention to some foreign intrigue. first, a story about a mysterious computer virus that struck an iranian nuclear plant. later, the report of how american agents hunted a notorious arms dealer. and finally, an account of a chinese-american spy trying to steal u.s. military secrets for china. we begin with the story of stuxnet, a computer virus considered to be the world's first destructive cyberweapon. it was launched several years ago against an iranian nuclear facility, almost certainly with some u.s. involvement. but as steve kroft repor
's the news live at the pentagon. are we getting a straight answer how this happened? reporter: well, in essence, someone finally noticed that after reporting to congress last year that attacks by the taliban were down by 7%, a figure derived from month-to-month reports from the field about the number of enemy attacks, in fact u.s. and nato officials didn't include the figures gathered by the afghans themselves, leading to the following statements promenade meteorologist. >> violence levels had been trending downward in the last two years after five years of steady increases, beginning in 2006. reporter: the problem is the attacks weren't trending downward. they were exactly the same as 2011. an embarrassing admission by the pentagon about how the president's strategy was bearing fruit, may have been misleading. >> shepard: what is the pentagon saying now? >> day blame the afghans. the afghan commanders forgot to submit their field reports so the pentagon data was misleading. quote: during a quality control check we became aware that some data was incorrectly entered into the databa
happening in the senate floor. dana bash on capitol hill. barbara starr at the pentagon. dana, i understand 15 republicans voting with the democrats to move forward on the official vote for hagel as defense secretary. how did it break down? what do we know? >> reporter: after all of the division, all of the debate, all of the delay, this was a pretty bipartisan vote to stop this filibuster and to allow the haguele nomination to go through. 71-27. that's right. 71-27. it wasn't even close to move this along. and we believe actually maybe more towards 18 republicans. we're trying to get the final breakdown. we can report that the final confirmation vote will happen in about two hours plus, 4:30 eastern. three hours, i should say. by the end of the day, chuck hagel, according to the vote, will be officially confirmed by the senate as the next defense secretary, after a lot of partisan division and pretty ugly back and forth about him and about his positions and it's gotten personal. >> and i want to bring in barbara starr at the pentagon. obviously there are some things he's dealing with strai
this country needs right now. >> earlier today, pentagon spokesman, george little, said they had made no plans to its overall defense strategy in the automatic budget cuts approach, the sequester would result in a 9% overall cut the military budget. he spoke with reporters at the pentagon for about 35 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> qaeda man. before getting to your questions, let me address one of the narratives in recent days regarding sequester set to begin friday unless congress acts. there seems to be a belief in some quarters that when it comes to negative impact the sequester will have on our national defense and military readiness, the department of defense is crying wolf. nothing could be further from the truth. he hurt from dod leaders in the past weeks is not hype. it is the blunt truth. it isn't exaggeration. as the clear eyed assessment of what would have been to the department if we were forced to put this mindless mechanism fully into place. under the guidance of secretary cannot come in the department leaders have been candid and forthright in describing how the military
. jenna: we researched the pentagon for a independent staff we haven't got it yet. we have the research department said if we had revisions in afghanistan over the years and we haven't found any. they told the associated press doesn't tell the full story of progress against the taliban. >> fair enough. it is a snapshot, not the movie. once again i think it is pretty important when the administration uses this. panetta said last year that attacks were down in afghanistan in 2012. it doesn't seem to be the case. if we need to get more answers. jenna: we'll look for more information. we continue to cover the story throughout the day here on fox news. peter, thanks for your insight. >> thanks for having me. jon: one town's attempt to go green has some folks seeing red amid complaints wind turbines are making people sick. all this could end up costing taxpayers millions. we're live with that story. >>> plus, what do you get when you cross a rodeo, kids and sheep? the answer is on the way. [ male announcer ] how do you measure happiness? by the armful? by the barrelful? e carful? how about...
at the department of defense. let's ask the military. >> ask you for an update on pentagon drone operations. >> probably not. >> well, let's hear what you have to say when i ask the question. >> okay. >> it has now been widely acknowledged that the u.s. military earlier this year, the military, pentagon, flew drone operations over pakistan's border region in cooperation with the pakistanis to collect reconnaissance information and show it to them. can you talk about why the u.s. military is now flying drone operations or did fly drone operations over pakistan? >> i can't. i know you say it's widely acknowledged. i don't know how widely anything has been acknowledged on that count. i don't think it's appropriate for me at this podium to discuss operations that may or may not be taking place. >> what concerns do you have that these u.s. government drone strikes in pakistan may be backfiring now and simply creating more enemies of the united states? >> i refer your questions to other people. that's not something we speak to or are involved in. >> who would you refer them to, jeff? where should
. >> reporter: the pentagon calls the cuts stupid. and it's hard to disagree. get this. there's billions of dollars the pentagon wants to cut, but isn't allowed. like the upgraded m-1 abrams tank, $3 billion. and the upgraded global hawk spy drone, $2.5 billion. with just over 48 hours until these cuts go into effect, you might think there would be urgent meetings going on here at the white house or up con capitol hill, but you would be wrong. there are no meetings or even phone calls on the schedule right now between the president and republican leaders. david? >> and friday is coming quickly, jon. our thanks to you tonight. >>> we're going to turn to iran this evening, where tonight, the iranian team is at the negotiating table with not only the u.s., but several other nations. those critical nuclear talks we've been reporting on for the last week here. as you know, we're just back from iran, where we witnessed first hand the economic sanctions led by america. so many of the iranians at the markets, at the schools, telling us they can feel it. many telling us also they're hoping for a
nations and people in the pentagon can count votes too. we've never had a defense secretary with this many opposing votes. now this is something he can shake off, but it's going to take some time. >> woodruff: that's right. i mean he has the fewest confirming volts of any defense secretary since the job was created. mark thompson, how does that affect his ability to do his job? >> well, it will depend. it will affect it in a big way if he acts as he did in his con for megs hearing which by all accounts he did not do well. conversely, i talked to people in the pentagon. the lower in ranks you go, the more they like this guy. the more they like the sense that an enlisted man is going to run the building. if you can use that as a springboard he's facing immense challenges from sequestration to afghanistan to a nuclear iran but it's an opportunity for him to seize the moment. if he does, people will forget this pretty quickly i think. >> woodruff: what about the sour relations or whatever lingering effect there is from this loud vote of no confidence from republicans in the senate? does that a
installing as, defense companies and the pentagon itself and virginia's democratic and republican lawmakers disagree on how to solve the crisis, there isboroing acknowledgment there might be no solution before friday. >> reporter: as president obama rallied, virginia's republican congressman questioned his holding a campaign-style southwest rage event whole no new talks are underway to prevent it from happening. >> the question i leave to you is to ask this, who the president can fix sequestration in the shipyard in virginia. if he can, i wish he would have been there a year ago so we wouldn't have to have this unstable situation. >> reporter: the virginiava congressmen are both members of the house armed services committee and both warn the axe will haunt virginia's economy and the nation's defense. >> it affects our readiness. the military chiefs don't have the ability to place the cuts thoughtfully and methodically across the defense budget. they have to go through and cut across the board. >> reporter: the damage could be significant. a white house briefing paper warns 90,000 civilian d
effect. the pentagon needs a seasoned leader to diplomat these cuts, cuts for which an overwhelmingly majority of republicans in congress voted. the so-called sequester, mr. president, was supported by 174 republicans in the house of representatives, 28 republicans here in the senate, 60% and 75% of the two republican bodies in this country. we have a balanced proposal to replace those across-the-board cuts for this year with smart spending reductions which must continue, a measure to close corporate tax loopholes and wasteful subsidies. and revenue from the wealthiest among us, americans making millions of dollars each year. it's critical that the republicans and democrats come together to find a balanced way to avert these drastic cuts. the consequence of the so-called sequester cuts are real not only for national defense but for millions of american families and businesses alike. three-quarters of a million jobs, 750,000 jobs, mr. president, are at stake. across the country tens of thousands of teachers, including thousands of workers with disabled children would be laid off. 70,00
military community where he plans to highlight painful cuts they say for the pentagon and the u.s. navy. but republican leaders calling on the president to quote, stop campaigning and help them solve the problem. but at the moment, there are no meetings planned between any of these sides, the house, the senate, the white house and they're taking friday off as of now. martha: all right. well the looming budget cuts were high on the agenda when the president sat down with the national governors association yesterday. arizona governor jan brewer went "on the record" with greta van susteren to get her impressions exactly what happened at that meeting. here's that. >> you know, he definitely says he wants to work together but obviously he doesn't want to compromise one little bit. bottom line he wants to raise taxes. and he doesn't want to cut. i think the american people believed, that the time now is to start cutting the budget. martha: so when it came to compromising governor brewer went on to say that the president said that the elections were basically behind him and that he was going t
the defense. $43 billion would be gutted from the pentagon this year. this morning on "jansing & co.," decorated msnbc military analyst jack jacobs said that the cuts will hurt military readyingness. >> in addition to fact -- and there's plenty of fact -- you're also going to cut ammunition, fuel, repair parts for aircraft, flying hours, training time. >> and just moments ago, i had the opportunity to speak with navy secretary ray mabus who said this way of cutting is hurting our military. >> we just cannot run a military lurching from one crisis to another. we've got to have some certainty and i think the president has presented a very balanced plan that will require some compromise. >> joining me is lynn jenkins of kansas. congresswoman, it's great to have you with me. i understand you took part in the conference that was held at the top of the hour and at the same time democrats held their own briefing. congressman chris van hollen made quite an anolg about the cuts. take a listen. >> rearranging the cuts is like rearranging the jobs either way. >> what is the illustration and wh
, actually the budget in the pentagon is still going to go up. do republicans risk not being seen as credible? >> i think everybody risks not being seen as credible. this more than many of the crises that we've seen congress and the white house deal with. on that particular issue of republicans in defense, i find it fascinating. i spoke with senator cornyn as some of my colleagues up here about that. and what he was saying is that he was trying to try out his message on us about the fact that republicans should in fact not be saying that the sky's going to fall with regard to defense, it has historically been the most important thing when it comes to budget for the republicans because even if these forced cults go into effect, overall defense spending will go up. there's a split among republicans. if you ask john mccain that, he'll say do not touch defense spending, you to do away with forced cuts. there definitely is what this is exposing is a real tug-of-war within the gop over one of the main goals which is getting rid of the deficit and debt and that means reduce spending everywhere and h
.2 trillion in cuts, half of it in the pentagon. across-the-board cuts, right? indiscriminate cuts. >> absolutely. >> bill: if it had been $10 trillion, half in the pentagon and half in the programs, the tea parties would have still said bring it on. right? that's their attitude. >> it is entirely possible. this is a group like many throughout the history of congress campaigned against government. ran against the congress. but unlike most in history never found that they had to make the transformation into governing. at some point, you have to be for something. you have to govern. even if you're for decreasing the size of government, you have to find a responsible way to do it. this is not responsible in any way. it cuts the good with the bad the efficient with the inefficient. it is going to cost us more money. when we breach the contracts in defense. so it is not the least bit rational. those that are saying that well, this is not a big deal, it is a small amount. it is a big amount and when you compound the fact that it's taking place now not over full year but over much less th
of veterans who are entitled to their health care by causing the pentagon possibly to have to reduce or eliminate tricare funding. that's just unconscionable to me. >> host: on the issue of blame that gregory kind of gets into, washington post poll out today asked about a thousand people about where they would assign blame in this sequester issue. 45% assigning it to congressional republicans, 32% to the president, another 13% assigned it equally between the two. about five more minutes of your calls, and we'll be back to the u.s. senate at 2:15 eastern. in california, rodney's on our democrats' line. >> caller: yes. i question the legality of the sequester agreement, because to my understanding sequester is to hold property by judicial authority. the property we're talking about here is the taxpayers' money. since congress has no judicial judicial -- since congress is not a judicial branch of the government with nor do they have judicial power, i don't understand how could they even implement the sequester? >> host: here's a tweet that says the sequester was obama's idea, but it bac
Search Results 0 to 28 of about 29 (some duplicates have been removed)